Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
Guest KING BLING

Secret CIA Prisons?

Recommended Posts

Guest KING BLING

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...422.html?sub=AR

 

 

U.S. Faces Scrutiny Over Secret Prisons

 

 

Officials in Eastern Europe Deny Role

 

By Craig Whitlock / Washington Post

 

THE HAGUE, Nov. 3 The International Committee of the Red Cross, the European Union and human rights groups said Thursday they would press the U.S. and European governments for information about the reported existence of secret prisons in Eastern Europe, where the CIA has detained top al Qaeda captives.

 

Government officials across that region issued denials Thursday that their countries hosted the prisons, which some European officials contend would violate local human rights laws. But the revelation, reported by The Washington Post on Wednesday, captured headlines across the continent and led human-rights organizations to call for official investigations.

 

The Post reported that the CIA had been interrogating some of its most important al Qaeda prisoners at a Soviet-era compound in Eastern Europe. The classified site is part of a global network of covert prisons the CIA established after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks with locations in eight countries, including Afghanistan, Thailand and several East European democracies.

 

In Brussels, a spokesman for the European Union, Friso Roscam Abbing, said that the E.U. would query its 25 member states to find out more about the prisons. Their existence, he said, could violate the European Convention on Human Rights and the international Convention Against Torture, treaties that all E.U. nations are bound to follow.

 

"We have to find out what is exactly happening," Roscam Abbing told reporters. "We have all heard about this."

 

Later Thursday, senior E.U. officials appeared to put a damper on any kind of official inquiry. Justice commissioner Franco Frattini said in a statement that the E.U. had no information on the Post report and it was therefore "not appropriate" for him to comment. Noting that the 25 E.U. countries are bound by human rights and anti-torture conventions, he said he would "encourage member states to look into this matter."

 

It is illegal for the U.S. government to hold prisoners in such isolation in secret prisons in the United States, which is why the CIA placed them overseas, according to several former and current intelligence officials and other U.S. officials. American legal experts and intelligence officials said that the CIA's internment practices would be considered illegal under the laws of several host countries.

 

The Post has not identified the East European countries involved in the secret program at the request of senior U.S. officials who argued that the disclosure could disrupt counterterrorism efforts. But the report has prompted a concerted effort by European news organizations and other groups to try to pinpoint the locations.

 

Human Rights Watch, a New York-based advocacy group, said it had obtained flight logs showing that a CIA-chartered aircraft had used airstrips in Poland and Romania in 2003, around the same time that the United States was transporting top al Qaeda prisoners from Afghanistan to other locations, including the U.S. naval prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

 

The Romanian Defense Ministry issued a statement saying it "was not aware that such a detention center existed" at the air base identified by Human Rights Watch. Prime Minister Calin Popescu Tariceanu was more direct: "We do not have CIA bases in Romania," he said on state television.

 

In Poland, undergoing a change in government after recent elections, current and former officials denied that the country was involved in the prison system.

 

In Russia, a number of news organizations reported on the Post story on their Web sites. Some headlines compared the CIA prisons to the Soviet gulag, the infamous network of prison camps. "Secret network of jails -- heritage of Gulag?" read the headline on the news site http://www.regions.ru. The headline on http://www.utro.ru read: "The Washington Post: CIA has created a new GULAG." Russian officials denied there were CIA prisons in their country.

 

In Geneva, the Red Cross said Thursday it has repeated a request to the U.S. government to allow the humanitarian organization to visit terrorism suspects held in isolation at secret locations. The Red Cross is allowed to visit prisoners held by the United States in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay but has previously expressed concern that U.S. officials were keeping some detainees hidden from its monitors.

 

"We are concerned at the fate of an unknown number of people captured as part of the so-called global war on terror and held at undisclosed places of detention," Antonella Notari, chief ICRC spokeswoman, told the Reuters news service.

 

Europe's leading human-rights organization, the Council of Europe, said it would open an investigation into the East European prisons.

 

The U.N. Human Rights Committee and the U.N. special rapporteur on torture said they have already been pressing the U.S. government to disclose the existence of any secret detention centers and would renew their efforts in response to the reports of the CIA prisons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest KING BLING

CIA asks Justice Dept. to review prisons report

 

 

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The CIA has sent a report to the U.S. Justice Department indicating classified information may have been leaked to The Washington Post for its recent story about secret prisons run by the spy agency, according to U.S. officials.

 

The newspaper reported last week that the CIA was holding top suspected al Qaeda terrorists at undisclosed prisons in eastern Europe and other locations.

 

The Justice Department refused to confirm or deny a referral was made.

 

The action by the CIA general counsel was taken immediately after the Washington Post article was published, an official said.

 

It is similar to one taken when covert officer Valerie Plame's name was made public in an article written by a syndicated columnist.

 

By law, when there is the possibility that classified information has been leaked, the CIA is required to inform the Justice Department, which generally launches an investigation into the matter.

 

Earlier Tuesday, Republican congressional leaders asked for an investigation into the matter, and Sen. Trent Lott of Mississippi suggested his own GOP colleagues could be to blame for the possible leak.

 

Sen. Bill Frist of Tennessee, the Senate majority leader, and Rep. Dennis Hastert of Illinois, the House speaker, asked the chairmen of the House and Senate intelligence committees to look into the report, saying the disclosure could damage national security.

 

"If accurate, such an egregious disclosure could have long-term and far-reaching damaging and dangerous consequences, and will imperil our efforts to protect the American people and our homeland from terrorist attacks," they wrote in a letter requesting the investigation.

 

Lott told reporters the information in the Post story was the same as that given to Republican senators in a closed-door briefing by Vice President Dick Cheney last week.

 

"Every word that was said in there went right to the newspaper," he said. "We can't keep our mouths shut."

 

Lott, a former Senate majority leader who was pushed out in 2002, suggested the information was passed along by a senator to a staff member.

 

He said the investigation Frist and Hastert want may result in an ethics probe of a Senate member.

 

Citing U.S. officials and those from other governments familiar with the arrangement, the Post reported Wednesday that top al Qaeda suspects were being held for questioning "at a Soviet-era compound in Eastern Europe" and other locations around the world.

 

Critics said the arrangement suggests U.S. agents are engaged in activities that would be illegal under American law.

 

Top U.S. officials would not confirm or deny the report, but insisted all prisoners are being treated humanely. President Bush said flatly Monday, "We do not torture."

 

A Washington Post spokesman said the paper had no comment on the possibility of an investigation.

 

The leak probe request was announced as top administration officials battled a Senate-approved measure that explicitly bars "cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment" of prisoners in U.S. custody.

 

The White House has threatened to veto a $440 billion Pentagon spending bill if it includes that measure, which is backed by Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona -- who as a prisoner of war during Vietnam was tortured by his North Vietnamese captors.

 

And it came a day after Democrats called for an independent investigation into the treatment of prisoners in American custody.

 

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi urged GOP leaders to initiate a broader investigation -- one that would include the 2003 leak of Valerie Plame's identity and the faulty intelligence used to argue for the invasion of Iraq.

 

"There is plenty to investigate about the Bush administration's use and misuse of intelligence," the California Democrat said in a written statement. "The American people deserve the truth."

 

Democratic Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada, the Senate minority leader, told CNN the GOP announcement was "just for show."

 

And a senior Democratic aide called it a way for Republicans to divert attention from the grand jury probe into the exposure of Plame, whose husband had publicly challenged a key element of the Bush administration's case for war.

 

That disclosure led to the October 28 indictment of Lewis "Scooter" Libby, who resigned as Cheney chief of staff.

 

Libby was charged with obstruction of justice, perjury and making false statements to federal agents investigating who revealed Plame's identity to reporters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest imported_Tesseract

This perfectly illustrates why most of the primary european countries (oldest members of the EU) werent extremely keen on adding another dozen of countries that werent on the same standards in the EU last year, but it still happened.

The pressure came directly from the US via the UK and you see most of the reasons here...shit, poland would need at least 10 years of progress but i guess after supporting the axis and sending troops to iraq shit became waay easier. The last 2 years washington&UK is really pressing to get Turkey in the EU which will be the end of EU as we know it...

 

The EU is a big joke for not being able to hold a pollitical voice or to focused in the finacial aspects of a union and as you already know the US doesnt recognise 90% of the western worlds higher courts, international treatees and regulations so dont expect anyone to lose sleep over that shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest imported_Tesseract

Also i dont see why is this a schock since Guantanamo operates in full secrecy and vurglary...

 

to late for spell check.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fascinated. I'm guessing he meant "vulgarly," but I'm not sure even that makes sense. Guantanamo's Camp X-Ray is not operating in secret, there are United States Marines and Marine officers, Navy officers, U.S. Navy hospital corpsmen, CIA men, FBI men and every other kind of law enforcement agency everywhere one looks. Nobody is being "disappeared" at Guantanamo.

 

However, I wouldn't bet that some seriously "vulgar" shit isn't going on at CIA prisons in Egypt, former Soviet satellite states and other places. Being an enemy of the United States has some serious negative consequences if you happen to wind up in the hands of the CIA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks, mr.authority-on-guantanamo

 

it's interesting to see that some people actually believe what the government tells them about what is transpiring in the fucking u.s. gulag.

 

gu·lag also Gu·lag Pronunciation Key (gläg)

n.

 

1. A network of forced labor camps in the former Soviet Union.

2. A forced labor camp or prison, especially for political dissidents.

3. A place or situation of great suffering and hardship, likened to the atmosphere in a prison system or a forced labor camp.

 

let's not forget the era of mccarthyism

being an 'enemy' does not always equal guilt.

all the innocent families ripped apart by that prison will produce a new terrorist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you think so, read Gulag Archipelago by Solzhenitsyn

 

GULAG (Glavnoe Upravlenie Ispravitelno-trudovykh Lagerei, "Chief Directorate of Corrective Labor Camps") is an acronym for the administration of the Soviet prison labor camp system. The word archipelago compares the system of labor camps spread across the Soviet Union with a vast "chain of islands"; known only to those who were fated to visit it. It also produces a rhyming title in Russian (arkhipelág gulág) that is not reproduced in English translation.

 

Solzhenitsyn originally wrote the book in secret after his own term as a political prisoner, but he had it published abroad in 1973 after the KGB confiscated a copy of the manuscript.

 

The detail of the book, which presented information on the putative crimes and criminals, their phony trials, the transportation and treatment of prisoners, which put the USSR in a negative light, chronicles a long history of oppression dating back to Lenin's absorption of the Tsarist penal system.

 

The book is a compilation of not only Solzhenitsyn's personal experiences in the Gulag, but also the experiences of 227 fellow prisoners. These prisoners were either ones that Solzhenitsyn knew personally or whose story he heard from others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest KING BLING

Frist concerned more about leaks than secret prisons

 

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/10/fri...s.ap/index.html

 

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist says he is more concerned about the leak of information regarding secret CIA detention centers than activity in the prisons themselves.

 

Frist told reporters Thursday that while he believed illegal activity should not take place at detention centers, he believes the leak itself poses a greater threat to national security and is "not concerned about what goes on" behind the prison walls.

 

"My concern is with leaks of information that jeopardize your safety and security -- period," Frist said. "That is a legitimate concern."

 

He noted that the CIA has also called for a federal criminal investigation into the leak of possibly classified information on secret prisons to The Washington Post. A November 2 Post article touched on a number of sensitive national security issues, including the existence of secret CIA detention centers for suspected terrorists in Eastern European democracies. The Bush administration has neither confirmed nor denied that report.

 

Frist was asked if that meant he was not concerned about investigating what goes on in detention centers.

 

"I am not concerned about what goes on and I'm not going to comment about the nature of that," Frist replied.

 

He added that as Senate majority leader he is privy to classified information and discussions about prison activity. "I'm going to make sure that everything that's done is consistent with the Constitution ... and the laws of the United States of America," he said.

 

Frist and House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Illinois, wrote the leaders of the House and Senate intelligence committees earlier this week calling for a joint congressional investigation into the leak.

 

"What is the actual and potential damage done to the national security of the United States and our partners in the global war on terror?" the letter said, referring to the leak.

 

The Post's story said the CIA has been hiding and interrogating some of its most important al Qaeda captives at a Soviet-era compound in Eastern Europe, part of a covert prison system set up by the agency four years ago that at various times has included sites in eight countries. Those countries, the Post said, include several democracies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by symbols@Nov 10 2005, 06:15 AM

if you think so, read Gulag Archipelago by Solzhenitsyn

 

read my comment again, i know fully well what a gulag is but ill repeat myself:

by the definition you posted, all jails in the world can be classified under it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

generally, state and federal prisons and jails are not known as 'political' prisons

 

and anyway, who the fuck cares? are you part of this discussion or are you trying to make some convoluted point about semantics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest KING BLING

I agree.

 

State and Federal Prisons - no exactly the most just state of things but they are out in the open. Convicts have rights to trials and lawyers and are held for stated crimes

 

Secret prisons, Gulags, Concentration camps - People are held en masse for no established reason. They have no oversight or review. Typically held for political reasons or under the guise of them being a threat to some campaign - though no public review or responce is allowed.

 

 

These are my definitions to contrast the two. I like how all the "constitutionalists" here seem perfectly okay with us doing the opposite of the constitution as long as it is not American soil...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by symbols@Nov 11 2005, 07:31 AM

generally, state and federal prisons and jails are not known as 'political' prisons

 

and anyway, who the fuck cares? are you part of this discussion or are you trying to make some convoluted point about semantics?

 

semantics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

King Bling---

 

The U.S. constitution does not apply outside of the United States. It is only in effect within the U.S. borders. A good case can be made, however, that any U.S. military base or embassy or consulate is U.S. soil, and therefore comes under the authority of the U.S. constitution.

 

This may be why the CIA is utilizing secret prisons in other countries, staffed by citizens of those countries, and completely under the control and authority of those other countries. I guess their rationale is that if they torture people with electric shock in secret Romanian intelligence service prisons, that is none of our affair.

 

I bet the new destination for detainees is JORDAN. And I bet the Jordanian people would have raised hell about it, until al-Queda thoughtfully blew up three hotels in Amman. Anybody smell Mossad? Oi vey. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by KaBar2@Nov 12 2005, 08:49 PM

The U.S. constitution does not apply outside of the United States. It is only in effect within the U.S. borders.

 

Blatant hipocracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by KaBar2@Nov 12 2005, 08:49 PM

King Bling---

 

The U.S. constitution does not apply outside of the United States. It is only in effect within the U.S. borders. A good case can be made, however, that any U.S. military base or embassy or consulate is U.S. soil, and therefore comes under the authority of the U.S. constitution.

 

This may be why the CIA is utilizing secret prisons in other countries, staffed by citizens of those countries, and completely under the control and authority of those other countries. I guess their rationale is that if they torture people with electric shock in secret Romanian intelligence service prisons, that is none of our affair.

 

I bet the new destination for detainees is JORDAN. And I bet the Jordanian people would have raised hell about it, until al-Queda thoughtfully blew up three hotels in Amman. Anybody smell Mossad? Oi vey. :rolleyes:

 

 

Anythings possible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blatant hipocracy.

 

SF1--What is that? Government by beatniks?

 

I think you mean "hypocrisy." Even then I think you are stretching it. Hypocrisy means feigning something virtuous or devout. The CIA is making no bones about it, they want to squeeze the terrorists like a sponge. Habeas corpus, habeas corpus ad subjiciendum, the Fourth Amendment, the Sixth Amendment and the Eighth Amendment apply to civilians accused of civil or criminal offenses within the United States. Military personnel are covered by the Uniform Code of Military Justice. EPW's (enemy prisoners of war) are covered by the Geneva Convention, if they meet the criteria as soldiers and not bandits, spies or saboteurs.

 

The Bill of Rights limits the power of the U.S. government in regards to interactions with the People of the United States. It does not limit the power of the U.S. government dealing with ENEMIES of the United States, that is wholly nonsensical. The terrorists arrested within the United States itself should have access to American courts, but those seized in foreign countries do not have any such access. In my opinion, officers and members of the civilian government of Iraq captured during hostilities or shortly thereafter should be treated in accordance with the Geneva convention, especially if they were captured in uniform. Those captured after the inauguration of the present Iraqi government no longer are bona fide soldiers of a legitimate government. The country of Iraq and the U.S. are now allies in the war against terrorism. "Insurgents" captured after the Iraqis voted on their constitution are absolutely nothing more than terrorists, saboteurs and spies. The war is over. They lost. They should lay down their arms and participate in the Iraqi political process. The reason they will not agree to do so is that they are fascists and tyrants, and they known damn good and well that they no longer have power, most likely will never again have power, and are persona non grata. They have the right to vote, and they have the right to OBEY THE LAW. They do NOT have a legitimate right to continue terrorist attacks, and definately not terrorist attacks against the Iraqi people, their government, their allies or their armed forces. Their actions are completely criminal and illegitimate, and when apprehended they can expect the dire consequences appropriate for someone who carries out plans of terrorism and political murder. They accepted the risk when they decided to carry out criminal acts of terror, kidnapping, murder, lynching, and war crimes against the Iraqi people. They deserve nothing more than a noose or a firing squad, but instead, they get allowed to live and to cooperate with the CIA. And cooperate they will, eventually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So let me get this straight, we spent billions of dollars and defined our foreign policy in the 70's-80's soley to defeat the "communist scourge" for their undemocratic nature and gulags and whatnot, just so that today we can be undemocratic and the ones running the gulags?

 

Does that mean that in the next decade, after "terrorism" has been killed or surrendered, will we use old Al Qeida terror training camps and suicide belts in the upcoming "War on __________ " ?

 

:haha:

 

To my buddy KABAR,

 

Why do you insist on writing obnoxiously long, jargon filled responses to everything on here. Why not just say "America can do no wrong and everyone can go get fucked" , and leave it at that? I'd disagree with that opinion, but at least you wouldn't have to waste so much time trying to sound smart all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, as you wish. "The United States can do no wrong and everybody else can get fucked." Happy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest KING BLING
Originally posted by KaBar2@Nov 12 2005, 12:49 PM

King Bling---

 

The U.S. constitution does not apply outside of the United States.  It is only in effect within the U.S. borders.  A good case can be made, however, that any U.S. military base or embassy or consulate is U.S. soil, and therefore comes under the authority of the U.S. constitution.

 

 

 

I understand the way the constitution works. The point is though that any country proffesing interest in bettering the world/creating a safer global environment should logically attempt to model its external behavior and influence the countries it holds sway over in a way that reflects its legal values. We are not neccesarily legally obligated by our own laws (though we have signed among other things the Geneva convention) to treat others as we would be treated, but it is selfish and the very essence of the hypocricy we are seen to embody that we would treat other prisoners worse than we would treat our own. If you do not hold this standard regarding our treatment of the outside world than your constitution is just a temporary law protecting a temporary society - its has no principal or merit if even the country holding such values is not willing to lend them to the world as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love how President Bush gives a speech emphasizing his claim that "We do not torture" while the White House is busy trying to get the CIA exempt from the torture ban. You can't write this stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Register for a 12ozProphet forum account or sign in to comment

You need to be a forum member in order to comment. Forum accounts are separate from shop accounts.

Create an account

Register to become a 12ozProphet forum member.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×